World Peace

THE SOLUTIONS

What are the solutions to Venezuela?

GoogleAI Mode: “As of January 4, 2026, the proposed solutions to the crisis in Venezuela following the U.S. military capture of Nicolás Maduro focus on three main areas: political transition, legislative constraints on war powers, and humanitarian stabilization.

1. Political Transition and Governance

Multiple actors are vying for a role in Venezuela’s future governance:

Opposition-Led Transition: Opposition leader María Corina Machado has called for Edmundo González Urrutia—widely viewed as the winner of the 2024 election—to be recognized as the legitimate president and commander-in-chief. She has proposed a transition that installs a new government within “the first 100 days”.

U.S. “Custodianship”: President Trump has proposed that the U.S. will “run” Venezuela for an unspecified period until a “safe, proper and judicious transition” can occur. This includes plans to seize and refurbish Venezuela’s oil reserves with the help of U.S. companies.

Managed Chavista Succession: Some analysts suggest an “off-ramp” where remaining members of the Maduro regime, such as Vice President Delcy Rodríguez, participate in a negotiated transition to avoid total state collapse. 

2. Legislative and Legal Solutions (U.S.)

To prevent further escalation or an open-ended military commitment, U.S. lawmakers are pursuing legal remedies:

War Powers Resolution: A bipartisan resolution (e.g., S.J.Res.90) is set for a vote to block the use of U.S. forces in Venezuela unless authorized by Congress.

Funding Prohibitions: Lawmakers like Senator Tim Kaine have proposed legislation to prohibit the use of federal funds for military force in Venezuela without explicit congressional approval.

Congressional Briefings: Leaders in both chambers are demanding immediate briefings from the administration to understand the legality of the “law enforcement” mission used to justify the strike. 

3. International and Humanitarian Solutions

Multilateral Mediation: The UN Security Council is scheduled to meet on Monday, January 5, at the request of Colombia to discuss the situation. Organizations like the Organization of American States (OAS) are viewed as critical for legitimizing a transitional government.

Economic Aid: A high priority for any new government will be accessing financing from multilateral organizations like the International Monetary Fund (IMF) to immediately increase imports of food and medicine.

Security Stabilization: Experts recommend an international stabilization force, possibly under a UN mandate, to provide the security necessary to deliver aid and organize new elections while deterring armed groups.

NGO-Led Relief: Organizations like World Vision and Save the Children are expanding child protection, food security, and water/sanitation programs to manage the ongoing humanitarian needs both within Venezuela and in neighboring host countries.”

THE VIABLE PATH

EXPLANATION 1

Explain: most viable path to a legitimate government

GoogleAI Mode: “In the immediate aftermath of the January 3, 2026, U.S. military capture of Nicolás Maduro, debate over the “most viable path” to a legitimate government is divided between three competing frameworks for transition.

1. The Democratic/Opposition Framework

Many international allies and domestic critics argue that legitimacy can only be restored through the leadership of the 2024 opposition winners. 

González-Machado Transition: French President Emmanuel Macron and UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer have publicly endorsed Edmundo González Urrutia—widely recognized as the true winner of the 2024 election—to lead a transitional government.

100-Day Plan: Opposition leader María Corina Machado has called for a transition that installs a new government within 100 days to address the humanitarian crisis and prepare for fresh, fair elections.

Multilateral Support: This path relies on support from the UN and the OAS to provide international legal standing and immediate access to IMF financing for food and medicine. 

2. The U.S. “Custodianship” Framework

President Trump has proposed a unilateral American-led administration as the necessary stabilizing force. 

“Running” the Country: Trump declared the U.S. will “run the country” until a “safe, proper and judicious transition” can occur. He has explicitly declined to endorse González or Machado, stating the U.S. cannot “take a chance” on who takes over next.

Oil-Driven Reconstruction: This path focuses on a “U.S.-led revamp” of the oil industry. Trump plans to recruit major American oil companies to spend billions refurbishing infrastructure, with the revenue used as “reimbursement” for U.S. damages and to fund Venezuelan services.

Compliance of Existing Officials: Trump indicated that Maduro’s Vice President, Delcy Rodríguez, could hold temporary power as long as she “does what we want”. 

3. The Power-Sharing/Compromise Framework

Some regional experts and foreign ministers argue that a unilateral U.S. occupation or a purely opposition-led government will lead to institutional collapse or civil war. 

Power-Sharing Structure: This path proposes a time-bound power-sharing governance council consisting of elements from the existing political elite, opposition forces, and international advisers.

Incentivized Negotiations: By offering guarantees or protections (such as limited immunity or lifting individual sanctions) to mid-ranking Chavistas, this path aims to prevent a “security state collapse” and ensure administrative continuity.

Inclusive Political Process: Norway and Japan have emphasized that an “inclusive political process” involving the remains of the current government is the only way to avoid a “breakdown of the world order” and ensure long-term stability. 

AI responses may include mistakes. Information may vary depending on location or individual circumstances.”

GoogleAI Mode: “In the immediate aftermath of the January 3, 2026, U.S. military capture of Nicolás Maduro, debate over the “most viable path” to a legitimate government is divided between three competing frameworks for transition.

1. The Democratic/Opposition Framework

Many international allies and domestic critics argue that legitimacy can only be restored through the leadership of the 2024 opposition winners. 

González-Machado Transition: French President Emmanuel Macron and UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer have publicly endorsed Edmundo González Urrutia—widely recognized as the true winner of the 2024 election—to lead a transitional government.

100-Day Plan: Opposition leader María Corina Machado has called for a transition that installs a new government within 100 days to address the humanitarian crisis and prepare for fresh, fair elections.

Multilateral Support: This path relies on support from the UN and the OAS to provide international legal standing and immediate access to IMF financing for food and medicine. 

2. The U.S. “Custodianship” Framework

President Trump has proposed a unilateral American-led administration as the necessary stabilizing force. 

“Running” the Country: Trump declared the U.S. will “run the country” until a “safe, proper and judicious transition” can occur. He has explicitly declined to endorse González or Machado, stating the U.S. cannot “take a chance” on who takes over next.

Oil-Driven Reconstruction: This path focuses on a “U.S.-led revamp” of the oil industry. Trump plans to recruit major American oil companies to spend billions refurbishing infrastructure, with the revenue used as “reimbursement” for U.S. damages and to fund Venezuelan services.

Compliance of Existing Officials: Trump indicated that Maduro’s Vice President, Delcy Rodríguez, could hold temporary power as long as she “does what we want”. 

3. The Power-Sharing/Compromise Framework

Some regional experts and foreign ministers argue that a unilateral U.S. occupation or a purely opposition-led government will lead to institutional collapse or civil war. 

Power-Sharing Structure: This path proposes a time-bound power-sharing governance council consisting of elements from the existing political elite, opposition forces, and international advisers.

Incentivized Negotiations: By offering guarantees or protections (such as limited immunity or lifting individual sanctions) to mid-ranking Chavistas, this path aims to prevent a “security state collapse” and ensure administrative continuity.

Inclusive Political Process: Norway and Japan have emphasized that an “inclusive political process” involving the remains of the current government is the only way to avoid a “breakdown of the world order” and ensure long-term stability. 

AI responses may include mistakes. Information may vary depending on location or individual circumstances.”

EXPLANATION 2

Explain: “most viable path to a legitimate government”

GoogleAI Mode: “In the context of the January 2026 crisis in Venezuela, the “most viable path to a legitimate government” refers to the strategies proposed to fill the power vacuum left by the capture of Nicolás Maduro. As of January 4, 2026, international consensus on this path is split between three primary models:

1. Recognition of the 2024 Election Results (The “González-Machado” Path)

Many legal experts and world leaders, including French President Emmanuel Macron and UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer, argue that legitimacy already exists in the person of Edmundo González Urrutia.

The Argument: Since independent observers and the U.S. State Department previously concluded that González won the 2024 election, the most viable path is to immediately swear him in as President.

Implementation: Opposition leader María Corina Machado has proposed a “100-day transition plan” to purge regime loyalists from the military and judiciary while installing a pro-democracy cabinet.

Authority: This path relies on the OAS (Organization of American States) and the UN Security Council to provide diplomatic recognition, which would unlock frozen assets and IMF (International Monetary Fund) credit lines.

2. U.S.-Led “Custodianship” (The “Trump” Path)

President Trump has proposed a more unilateral approach, arguing that a sudden transition to the opposition could lead to chaos or a “failed state” scenario.

The Argument: Trump asserts that the U.S. must “run” Venezuela temporarily because the country is too “broken” for immediate self-governance.

Implementation: This involves a U.S. military or administrative presence to “refurbish” the oil industry using American firms. Trump has suggested he may keep some regime officials, such as Vice President Delcy Rodríguez, in place as long as they follow U.S. directives.

Critique: Critics argue this path lacks “legitimacy” under international law and could be viewed as a colonial-style occupation, potentially fueling a long-term insurgency.

3. Negotiated Power-Sharing (The “Regional Mediation” Path)

Nations like Colombia, Brazil, and Norway argue that neither a U.S. occupation nor a total opposition takeover is viable without the cooperation of the Venezuelan military (FANB).

The Argument: To avoid civil war, a “legitimate” government must include a coalition of opposition leaders and moderate “Chavistas” (loyalists of the former regime).

Implementation: This would involve a Governance Council that manages the country for 12–18 months, culminating in entirely new, internationally monitored elections.

Incentives: This path uses “off-ramps,” such as amnesty for military leaders, to ensure they don’t fight to the death to protect the old regime.

Summary of Viability

As of January 4, 2026, the “González-Machado” path is seen as the most legally legitimate by the international community, whereas the “Trump Custodianship” is the most likely to be implemented in the short term due to the presence of U.S. boots on the ground. The ultimate “viable” path will likely depend on whether the U.S. Congress uses the War Powers Resolution to force a U.S. withdrawal, shifting power back to a civilian-led Venezuelan transition.”

THE BEST PATH: IHRL & IHL

EXPLANATION 1

Considering IHRL & IHL, what is the best viable path to a legitimate Venezuelan government?

GoogleAI Mode: “In the context of the January 2026 crisis, determining the “best” viable path to a legitimate government depends on balancing International Humanitarian Law (IHL), which governs conduct during armed conflict, and International Human Rights Law (IHRL), which applies at all times to protect individual rights.

Under these frameworks, the following path is considered the most legally and ethically viable:

1. De-escalation and Avoidance of Occupation (IHL Focus)

Legal experts warn that a continued U.S. presence to “run” the country could be classified as an illegal occupation under IHL, which requires an occupying power to respect the laws in force in the country and prohibits the exploitation of its resources (like oil) for the occupier’s gain. 

Viable Path: Immediate withdrawal of U.S. forces and a transition of security responsibilities to a legitimate domestic or internationally mandated neutral force to prevent the conflict from devolving into a civil war. 

2. Recognition of Democratic Legitimacy (IHRL Focus)

IHRL emphasizes the right of a people to self-determination and to choose their own government through free and fair elections (Article 1 of the ICCPR). 

Viable Path: Recognizing Edmundo González Urrutia and the opposition-led National Assembly as the legitimate representatives of the Venezuelan people. Numerous states and the UN Panel of Experts have already noted that the 2024 election results used by Maduro to claim victory lacked transparency and integrity. 

3. Transition via Inclusive Dialogue (Multilateral Path)

A viable path must also satisfy the principle of “effective control” while moving toward “democratic legitimacy”. 

Negotiated Solution: The UN, OAS, and regional partners (like Colombia and Brazil) advocate for a negotiated, peaceful solution based on the will of the Venezuelan people. This includes:

Release of Political Prisoners: Unconditional release of hundreds held in government custody.

Restoration of Institutions: Re-democratizing the country in accordance with international law and ensuring human rights are guaranteed without excuse.

UN Security Council Role: Utilizing the scheduled Monday, January 5 emergency session to establish a multilateral roadmap that avoids unilateral “gunboat diplomacy”. 

Summary of the Best Path

The most viable path under international law is a multilateral transition that rejects unilateral U.S. governance and instead empowers the opposition leaders recognized by the international community as the rightful winners of the 2024 election. This path must be guided by restraint, de-escalation, and full respect for human rights to ensure long-term regional stability.”

EXPLANATION 2

Considering IHRL, IHL & Venezuela, what is the best path to a legitimate government?

GoogleAI Mode: “In the context of the January 2026 crisis, the “best” path to a legitimate Venezuelan government under International Humanitarian Law (IHL) and International Human Rights Law (IHRL) is one that prioritizes self-determination, multilateralism, and de-escalation.

As of January 4, 2026, the proposed solutions align with these legal frameworks:

1. Recognition of Prior Electoral Will (IHRL)

IHRL protects the right of citizens to participate in government through free and fair elections. 

González-Machado Recognition: Numerous experts and world leaders argue that the most legitimate path is recognizing Edmundo González, the 2024 opposition candidate. Reports from the UN Panel of Experts have previously noted that Maduro’s 2024 victory claims lacked transparency and integrity.

Domestic Restoration: Restoring the National Assembly’s authority is viewed as a critical step because it remains the only institution with largely unchallenged democratic legitimacy. 

2. Transition via Multilateral Mediation (IHL & UN Charter)

Under IHL, unilateral military intervention and occupation are generally prohibited without explicit UN Security Council authorization or a valid claim of self-defense. 

UN-Led Roadmap: The UN Security Council is scheduled to meet on Monday, January 5, 2026, to establish a legal framework for transition. UN experts emphasize that “unlawful attacks and threats” must cease in favor of a peaceful settlement under the UN Charter.

Regional Cooperation: Involving the Organization of American States (OAS) and neighboring countries like Brazil and Colombia is considered essential to avoid a “security vacuum” or a long-term U.S. occupation, which many label as illegal under international law. 

3. Transitional Justice and Human Rights (IHRL)

A legitimate government must address past and ongoing violations to restore public trust and institutional integrity. 

UN Fact-Finding Mission: The mandate of the UN Fact-Finding Mission on Venezuela continues through September 2026, providing a mechanism for investigating crimes against humanity and ensuring accountability.

Inclusive Political Process: Diplomatic mediators, such as those from Norway, advocate for power-sharing agreements and “credible transitional justice” that include guarantees for all political actors to prevent a cycle of violence.

Protection of Rights: The UN High Commissioner for Human Rights has called for the unconditional release of political prisoners and the protection of civil society as foundational requirements for any legitimate new government. 

4. Avoiding “Custodianship” (IHL Risks)

President Trump’s proposal to “run” Venezuela and seize oil resources to “reimburse” the U.S. is viewed by many legal scholars as a violation of sovereignty and IHL principles regarding the treatment of occupied territory and resources. The best path avoids unilateral “gunboat diplomacy” in favor of a transition led by Venezuelans and supported by a neutral international stabilization force.”

IHRL & IHL VIOLATIONS

EXPLANATION 1

Considering IHRL & IHL, what are the violations?

GoogleAI Mode: “As of January 4, 2026, the U.S. military operation in Venezuela is being scrutinized for significant violations of International Humanitarian Law (IHL) and International Human Rights Law (IHRL). These legal frameworks address both the conduct of the U.S. intervention and the ongoing internal situation in Venezuela.

1. Violations by the United States (External Intervention)

Legal experts and international bodies have identified several core violations related to the January 3 strike and subsequent capture of Nicolás Maduro:

Illegal Act of Aggression (IHL): Under the UN Charter (Article 2(4)), the use of force against a sovereign state is prohibited unless authorized by the UN Security Council or conducted in self-defense. Experts note that drug trafficking does not meet the “armed attack” threshold required to trigger the right to self-defense.

Extrajudicial Killings (IHRL): The U.S. has conducted dozens of “boat strikes” against vessels allegedly carrying drugs, killing over 115 people since September 2025. UN experts label these as arbitrary deprivations of life because lethal force was used against individuals who posed no immediate threat.

Unlawful Abduction/Kidnapping: The forcible removal of a foreign leader and his wife from their home country to stand trial in the U.S. is characterized by scholars as an “illegal abduction” or kidnapping.

Violation of Self-Determination (IHRL): Experts from the OHCHR state that any attempt by an external power to impose regime change violates the right of a people to determine their own political future, as protected by the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). 

2. Violations by the Maduro Regime (Internal Governance)

Prior to and during the current crisis, the UN Fact-Finding Mission and other organizations documented systematic abuses by the Venezuelan government:

Crimes Against Humanity: The UN has recorded a pattern of extrajudicial killings, enforced disappearances, and torture used to repress political opposition following the disputed 2024 election.

Arbitrary Detention of Children: Reports indicate that hundreds of children were detained and allegedly tortured to force incriminating statements following post-election protests.

Suppression of Fundamental Freedoms: The regime is accused of “significant setbacks” in media freedom, including the arbitrary detention of journalists and the confiscation of media equipment. 

3. IHL Risks of “Custodianship”

President Trump’s plan to “run” Venezuela and utilize its oil resources to “reimburse” the U.S. raises further IHL concerns:

Illegal Exploitation of Resources: IHL prohibits an occupying power from seizing or exploiting the private or state property of an occupied territory for its own economic benefit.

Duty to Protect Civilians: As an intervening force, the U.S. now bears the legal responsibility under the Geneva Conventions to ensure the safety and basic needs of the civilian population, including preventing a humanitarian collapse during the transition. 

AI responses may include mistakes. For legal advice, consult a professional.”

EXPLANATION 2

Considering IHRL, IHL & Venezuela, what are the violations?

GoogleAI Mode: “In the context of the January 2026 crisis, violations of International Humanitarian Law (IHL) and International Human Rights Law (IHRL) involve both the conduct of the U.S. military intervention and the long-standing repression by the Maduro administration. 

Violations by the United States (Military Operation)

International law experts and UN officials have identified several primary violations regarding the January 3 strike and the ongoing maritime campaign: 

Unlawful Use of Force & Crime of Aggression (IHL): Under Article 2(4) of the UN Charter, the unilateral military strike on January 3 is characterized as an illegal act of aggression. Experts state there was no authorization from the UN Security Council and no valid claim of “self-defense” under Article 51, as drug trafficking does not constitute an “armed attack” by a state.

Extrajudicial Killings (IHRL): The U.S. maritime campaign, “Operation Southern Spear,” has reportedly killed at least 115 people since September 2025 in strikes against suspected drug-trafficking vessels. UN experts label these as “extrajudicial executions” because lethal force was used against individuals who posed no imminent threat to life at the time of the strikes.

Illegal Blockade (IHL): The partial maritime blockade imposed by the U.S. in December 2025 is cited as a prohibited use of military force and a violation of the international right to life by endangering the region’s security.

Abduction of a Foreign National: The capture of Nicolás Maduro and his wife is described by legal scholars as an “illegal abduction” or kidnapping, violating Venezuela’s national sovereignty and territorial integrity. 

Violations by the Maduro Administration (Internal Repression) 

The UN Fact-Finding Mission on Venezuela and other bodies have documented systematic violations by the Maduro regime that are ongoing or occurred leading up to the 2026 crisis: 

Crimes Against Humanity (IHRL): The UN has found reasonable grounds to believe state security forces (including the GNB and SEBIN) committed crimes against humanity, including extrajudicial killings, enforced disappearances, and torture.

Torture of Detained Children: Following the disputed 2024 elections, human rights organizations reported that children were arbitrarily detained and tortured—including through electric shocks and beatings—to force them to record incriminating videos.

Systematic Suppression of Dissent: The government intensified a crackdown on political activists, human rights defenders, and journalists through arbitrary arrests and long-term detention without trial.

Widespread Impunity: Reports indicate a near-total lack of willingness by the state to prosecute those responsible for rights abuses, with no convictions for 95% of killings during protests between 2014 and 2024. 

Emerging Risks

Occupation Concerns (IHL): Amnesty International and other groups warn that any attempt by the U.S. to “run” Venezuela or control its oil resources would constitute an illegal occupation and a violation of the principle of self-determination.

Civilian Casualties: Early reports from the January 3 strike estimate at least 40 deaths, including civilians, raising concerns about the IHL principle of proportionality during military operations in populated areas like Caracas.”